[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

Hi Michael, On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:53 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Nov 24, 1:48 am, "Minh Nguyen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi Michael, > > Hi Minh, > > > >> I re-ran the tests under the above Mac OS X system, using this command: >> >> /path-to-sage-root/sage -testal

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 24, 1:48 am, "Minh Nguyen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Michael, Hi Minh, > I re-ran the tests under the above Mac OS X system, using this command: > > /path-to-sage-root/sage -testall -verbose > > This time, I only have one failed test, namely > > sage -t -verbose devel/sage/sage/

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

Hi Michael, On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:57 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Nov 22, 11:54 pm, "Minh Nguyen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:49 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> [...] >> >> The source distro built fine on the following 32-bit s

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

Hi William, Thanks a lot for that, it works now. The last command took a long time (an hour or so). Stan William Stein wrote: > > The upgrade failed somehow. Try this: > > sage: hg_sage.pull() > sage: hg_sage.merge() > sage: quit > > sage -br > > and see if things are any better. > > William

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Stan Schymanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hm, I did a sage -upgrade on Mac OS X 10.4.11 on a MacBook Pro and > everything worked fine. When I start sage, it tells me that it is > "Sage Version 3.2, Release Date: 2008-11-20", but when I open a > notebook and t

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

Hm, I did a sage -upgrade on Mac OS X 10.4.11 on a MacBook Pro and everything worked fine. When I start sage, it tells me that it is "Sage Version 3.2, Release Date: 2008-11-20", but when I open a notebook and type version(), it returns: 'SAGE Version 3.1.4, Release Date: 2008-10-20'. Both the com

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 22, 11:54 pm, "Minh Nguyen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:49 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [...] > >> The source distro built fine on the following 32-bit system: > > >> Machine Model: MacBook2,1 > >> Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo > >> Processor

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:49 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] >> The source distro built fine on the following 32-bit system: >> >> Machine Model: MacBook2,1 >> Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo >> Processor Speed: 2 GHz >> Memory: 1 GB >> System Version: Mac OS X 10.4.8 (8N1430) >>

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 22, 11:46 pm, "Minh Nguyen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 1:44 PM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Minh, > > Hi, > > > For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released.  You can get the > > source from here:http://sagemath.org/src/ > > Or you can do "sag

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 1:44 PM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released. You can get the > source from here: http://sagemath.org/src/ > Or you can do "sage -upgrade". Sage-3.2 built and passed all tests on these 32-bit x86 systems: --

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 6:46 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Nov 22, 6:43 pm, Ronan Paixão <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > Sure, if there actually is somebody out there who has ever used the >> > spkg/archive. >> > I'm kind of guessing nobody has ever used it, in which ca

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 22, 6:43 pm, Ronan Paixão <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sure, if there actually is somebody out there who has ever used the > > spkg/archive. > > I'm kind of guessing nobody has ever used it, in which case it seems > > completely > > pointless to support. > > > William > > A compromi

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

Em Sáb, 2008-11-22 às 15:17 -0800, William Stein escreveu: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 22, 2008, at 6:11 PM, William Stein wrote: > > > > >> > >> The only reason that archive/ directory exists is that when I wrote > >> the > >> Sa

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 22, 3:41 pm, Ronan Paixão <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It might be a very good idea to have "sage -upgrade" interactively ask > > the user if they "really want to do this" if they are upgrading a binary. > > If a user built from source in the first place, "sage -upgrade" is pretty > > l

[sage-devel] Re: [Bulk] [sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

> > It might be a very good idea to have "sage -upgrade" interactively ask > the user if they "really want to do this" if they are upgrading a binary. > If a user built from source in the first place, "sage -upgrade" is pretty > likely to work (or at least, should be supported). If they install

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

William Stein wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> it >> might be nice to have as an upgrade option. > > Sure, if there actually is somebody out there who has ever used the > spkg/archive. > I'm kind of guessing nobody has ever used it, in which case

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

mabshoff wrote: > Jaap: Out of curiosity: how large is your install.log by now? > [EMAIL PROTECTED] spkg]# ls -l ../install.log -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 19711987 2008-10-21 13:23 ../install.log Lol! Jaap > Cheers, > > Michael > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Nov 22, 2008, at 6:11 PM, William Stein wrote: > >> >> The only reason that archive/ directory exists is that when I wrote >> the >> Sage package system I was very paranoid about never ever deleting >> anything, fo

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 22, 3:08 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 3:06 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Or it should truncate the no longer used spkgs to zero bytes. We > > already have a ticket to do so, but I can't find it right now. > > No, it shouldn't do

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 22, 2008, at 6:11 PM, William Stein wrote: >>> > > The only reason that archive/ directory exists is that when I wrote > the > Sage package system I was very paranoid about never ever deleting > anything, for fear of losing valuable work. But it's kind of > ridiculous > that you're

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > William Stein wrote: > >> >> My spkg/archive directory is pretty big: >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/s/spkg$ du -sch archive/ >> 566Marchive/ >> 566Mtotal >> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] spkg]# du -sch archive/ > 3.6Garchiv

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

William Stein wrote: > > My spkg/archive directory is pretty big: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/s/spkg$ du -sch archive/ > 566Marchive/ > 566Mtotal > [EMAIL PROTECTED] spkg]# du -sch archive/ 3.6Garchive/ 3.6Gtotal > All that stuff can be safely deleted. It probably should be dele

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 3:06 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Nov 22, 2:57 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 2:54 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > On Nov 22, 2:24 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> mabshoff wrote

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 22, 2:57 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 2:54 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Nov 22, 2:24 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> mabshoff wrote: > > > > > >> I have a system wide sage install owned by root in /usr/local/s

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 2:54 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Nov 22, 2:24 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> mabshoff wrote: > > > >> I have a system wide sage install owned by root in /usr/local/sage. >> I always upgrade the install as root. And most of the time >> I

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 22, 2:24 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > mabshoff wrote: > I have a system wide sage install owned by root in /usr/local/sage. > I always upgrade the install as root. And most of the time > I think of doing the chmod. > > See the rich history of this install! > > > [EMAIL P

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Georg S. Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> See the rich history of this install! >> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] installed]# ls sage-* >> > sage-1.5.1.2 sage-1.8.2.1 sage-2.10.3 sage-2.4 sage-2.5.3 >> > sage-2.8.13 sage-2.8.4.1 sage-2.8.9sage-3.0.5

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

William Stein wrote: > > It's undoubtedly because the user did "sage -upgrade" as root, but didn't > run Sage ever as root. The right solution is for the user to just type > > sage > > once as root. > Shouldn't this be part of the upgrade process? Jaap --~--~-~--~~---

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

> See the rich history of this install! > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] installed]# ls sage-* > > sage-1.5.1.2  sage-1.8.2.1  sage-2.10.3   sage-2.4      sage-2.5.3   > > sage-2.8.13   sage-2.8.4.1  sage-2.8.9    sage-3.0.5 > > sage-1.5.3    sage-1.9      sage-2.10.4   sage-2.4.1    sage-2.6     > > sag

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

mabshoff wrote: > > > On Nov 22, 2:06 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Jaap Spies wrote: >>> William Stein wrote: Hi, For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released. You can get the source from here:http://sagemath.org/src/ Or you can do "sage -upgrade". Bin

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Georg S. Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Jaap, > > On 22 Nov., 22:54, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> William Stein wrote: >> > Hi, >> >> > For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released. You can get the >> > source from here:http://sagemath.org/s

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 2:09 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Nov 22, 2:06 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Jaap Spies wrote: >> > William Stein wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released. You can get the >> >> source from here:http://sa

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

Hi Jaap, On 22 Nov., 22:54, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > William Stein wrote: > > Hi, > > > For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released.  You can get the > > source from here:http://sagemath.org/src/ > > Or you can do "sage -upgrade". > > > Binaries and an official announcement shou

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 22, 2:06 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jaap Spies wrote: > > William Stein wrote: > >> Hi, > > >> For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released.  You can get the > >> source from here:http://sagemath.org/src/ > >> Or you can do "sage -upgrade". > > >> Binaries and an offici

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

Jaap Spies wrote: > William Stein wrote: >> Hi, >> >> For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released. You can get the >> source from here: http://sagemath.org/src/ >> Or you can do "sage -upgrade". >> >> Binaries and an official announcement should come within a day or two. >> >> William >> > >

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

William Stein wrote: > Hi, > > For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released. You can get the > source from here: http://sagemath.org/src/ > Or you can do "sage -upgrade". > > Binaries and an official announcement should come within a day or two. > > William > After sage -upgrade I get: [E

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

I just built 3.2 on this 64-bit linux machine: Linux version 2.6.18.8-0.3-default ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 4.1.2 20061115 (prerelease) (SUSE Linux)) #1 SMP Tue Apr 17 08:42:35 UTC 2007 Testing gives this error: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/equations.py sage -t de

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 21, 12:42 pm, Octoploid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 21, 7:51 pm, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This seems to indicate that you upgraded from a binary build with a C+ > > + compiler using a different ABI. What did you upgrade from? Did you > > upgrade the C++ compiler

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 21, 7:51 pm, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 21, 9:45 am, Octoploid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Nov 20, 10:44 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released.  You can get the > > > source from here:http:

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 20, 2008, at 1:44 PM, William Stein wrote: > > Hi, > > For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released. You can get the > source from here: http://sagemath.org/src/ > Or you can do "sage -upgrade". > > Binaries and an official announcement should come within a day or two. Mac OS X, 10.5.

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 21, 11:54 am, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just compiled and ran make test on Mac OS X 10.5.5 > on my MacBook 2.1GHz. All tests passed except, > The following tests failed: > >         sage -t  devel/sage/sage/misc/sageinspect.py > > One thing I noticed is that the director

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

I just compiled and ran make test on Mac OS X 10.5.5 on my MacBook 2.1GHz. All tests passed except, sage -t devel/sage/sage/misc/sageinspect.py ** File "/Users/tjlahey/sage/devel/sage/sage/misc/sageinspect.py",

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 21, 9:45 am, Octoploid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 20, 10:44 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released.  You can get the > > source from here:http://sagemath.org/src/ > > Or you can do "sage -upgrade". > > I ran "

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 20, 10:44 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released.  You can get the > source from here:http://sagemath.org/src/ > Or you can do "sage -upgrade". I ran "sage -upgrade" on my system amd64, gcc 4.3.2. This is what I get after

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 2:20 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Nov 20, 2:16 pm, mhampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Is there any difference from 3.2.rc2? >> -Marshall > > Three patches in the Sage library as well as a fix for the ext repo, > so upgrading is highly recommended.

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

On Nov 20, 2:16 pm, mhampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there any difference from 3.2.rc2? > -Marshall Three patches in the Sage library as well as a fix for the ext repo, so upgrading is highly recommended. Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.2

Is there any difference from 3.2.rc2? -Marshall On Nov 20, 3:44 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > For early adopters, sage-3.2 has been released. You can get the > source from here:http://sagemath.org/src/ > Or you can do "sage -upgrade". > > Binaries and an official annou

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc2 released!

Hi, on Intel Core2 Duo MacBook OS X 10.4.11 / XCode 2.5 builds fine (with 'make -j2'). Running " 'make -j2' test " outputs some crap right about "sage" and "doc" at the start: {{{ sage-spkg sage-3.2.rc2 You must set the SAGE_ROOT environment variable or run this script from the SAGE_ROOT or SAGE

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc2 released!

All tests passed on an intel mac, os 10.5. -M. Hampton On Nov 20, 5:10 am, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > mabshoff wrote: > > Hello folks, > > > here goes rc2 which fixes the last set of blockers left over from > > 3.2.rc1. it has been out for eight hours in IRC, but it seems like a > >

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc2 released!

mabshoff wrote: > Hello folks, > > here goes rc2 which fixes the last set of blockers left over from > 3.2.rc1. it has been out for eight hours in IRC, but it seems like a > good idea to announce it here. Aside from #4557 this should be it for > patches merged into 3.2, so please build, test and

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

On Nov 15, 2008, at 03:15 , mabshoff wrote: > > Hello folks, > > here goes the slightly delayed 3.2.rc1 with some goodies from SD 11 as > well as various fixes from Bug Day 16. There are actually *four* > segfault fixes in this build. On top the cleanup up build system, i.e. > massive speedups t

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

On Nov 15, 2008, at 15:39 , mabshoff wrote: > > > > On Nov 15, 3:36 pm, "Justin C. Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Built w/o problems on Mac OS X, 10.5.5 (Dual Quad Xeon). Testing >> showed two failures, as follows. Should I file bug reports? > > Both are known failures with ticke

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

On Nov 15, 3:36 pm, "Justin C. Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Built w/o problems on Mac OS X, 10.5.5 (Dual Quad Xeon).  Testing   > showed two failures, as follows.  Should I file bug reports? Both are known failures with tickets, so no need to do anything besides fixing them :) > Jus

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

On Nov 15, 2008, at 03:15 , mabshoff wrote: > > Hello folks, > > here goes the slightly delayed 3.2.rc1 with some goodies from SD 11 as > well as various fixes from Bug Day 16. There are actually *four* > segfault fixes in this build. On top the cleanup up build system, i.e. > massive speedups t

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

Hi, on Intel Mac OS X 10.4.11 / XCode 2.5 only three of these: On 15 Nov., 21:07, John H Palmieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On intel mac running 10.5, four tests failed with sage -testall -long, > all of which are known issues: > > wester.py numerical noise

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

All tests passed gutsy x86_64 On Nov 15, 3:15 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello folks, > > here goes the slightly delayed 3.2.rc1 with some goodies from SD 11 as > well as various fixes from Bug Day 16. There are actually *four* > segfault fixes in this build. On top the cleanup up

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

2008/11/15 mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > On Nov 15, 8:25 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I had one doctest failure on a 32-bit ubuntu laptop: >> >> sage -t devel/sage/sage/combinat/species/library.py >> *

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

On Nov 15, 12:25 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Jaap, > This was already in rc0: Yes, I do remember, but we did not open a ticket then :) > Jaap Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroup

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

mabshoff wrote: > > > On Nov 15, 8:25 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I had one doctest failure on a 32-bit ubuntu laptop: >> >> sage -t devel/sage/sage/combinat/species/library.py >> ** >> File "/home/john/sag

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

On Nov 15, 8:25 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I had one doctest failure on a 32-bit ubuntu laptop: > > sage -t  devel/sage/sage/combinat/species/library.py > ** > File "/home/john/sage-3.2.rc1/devel/sage/sage/c

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

On intel mac running 10.5, four tests failed with sage -testall -long, all of which are known issues: wester.py numerical noise matrix_double_dense numerical noise sr.py out of memory

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

John Cremona wrote: > I had one doctest failure on a 32-bit ubuntu laptop: > > sage -t devel/sage/sage/combinat/species/library.py > ** > File "/home/john/sage-3.2.rc1/devel/sage/sage/combinat/species/library.py", > line 86: >

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc1 released

I had one doctest failure on a 32-bit ubuntu laptop: sage -t devel/sage/sage/combinat/species/library.py ** File "/home/john/sage-3.2.rc1/devel/sage/sage/combinat/species/library.py", line 86: sage: a.automorphism_group() Ex

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

I know this is late, but all tests passed and the build went fine on my work machine, which runs amd64 hardy heron. On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 7:24 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello folks, > > here is 3.2.rc0 and I have to confess that I cheated: I did build this > on numerous platf

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

On Nov 11, 2008, at 04:24 , mabshoff wrote: > > Hello folks, [snip] > > Sources and a sage.math only binary can be found at > > http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/release-cycles-3.2/ Built w/o problems on Mac OS X, 10.5.5 (Dual Quad Xeon). Testing revealed two failures (see below)

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

> > sage: numpy.linalg.inv(a) > > > > array([[ 2.25125019e+15, -4.50250038e+15, 2.25125019e+15], > > [ -4.50250038e+15, 9.00500077e+15, -4.50250038e+15], > > [ 2.25125019e+15, -4.50250038e+15, 2.25125019e+15]]) > > I get this: > sage: scipy.linalg.inv(a) > > array([[

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

John H Palmieri wrote: > sage: scipy.linalg.det(a) > 0.0 > sage: scipy.linalg.inv(a) > > array([[ -4.50359963e+15, 9.00719925e+15, -4.50359963e+15], >[ 9.00719925e+15, -1.80143985e+16, 9.00719925e+15], >[ -4.50359963e+15, 9.00719925e+15, -4.50359963e+15]]) > sage: nump

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

mabshoff wrote: > > > On Nov 12, 4:28 pm, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> John H Palmieri wrote: > > > >>> Oh, this is the problem. I'm running tcsh (I got used to it years >>> ago, and keep deciding it's too much work to switch). When I switch >>> to bash, everything works. >> I

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

> One more time, could you do the following sequence of commands so that I > can report them to the numpy mailing list.  I've left the output from my > run; it's interesting that the numpy.linalg.inv on my computer gives the > same ridiculous answers that your scipy.linalg.inv command gives.  It >

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

On Nov 12, 4:28 pm, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John H Palmieri wrote: > > Oh, this is the problem.  I'm running tcsh (I got used to it years > > ago, and keep deciding it's too much work to switch).  When I switch > > to bash, everything works. > > I get the same error (using ba

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

John H Palmieri wrote: > On Nov 11, 12:07 pm, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Nov 11, 12:02 pm, John H Palmieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Nov 11, 11:57 am, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: John H Palmieri wrote: > On Nov 11, 4:24 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTEC

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

Actually, I have a numpy question, and since we're on the topic ... The following is somewhat frustrating: sage: R = RDF['x'] sage: f = R([4, 4, 1, 4, 2, 0, 1]) sage: f.roots(algorithm='pari') [(-1.0, 1), (-1.0, 1)] sage: f.roots() # uses numpy [] sage: import numpy sage: numpy.roots(f.reverse(

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

John H Palmieri wrote: > On Nov 12, 6:41 am, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> John H Palmieri wrote: >>> an error in matrix_double_dense, which I couldn't find on trac (should >>> I create a ticket?): >>> sage -t devel/sage/sage/matrix/matrix_double_dense.pyx >>>

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

On Nov 12, 8:20 am, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John H Palmieri wrote: > > On Nov 12, 6:41 am, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> John H Palmieri wrote: > >>> an error in matrix_double_dense, which I couldn't find on trac (should > >>> I create a ticket?): > > Yes, please cre

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

John H Palmieri wrote: > On Nov 12, 6:41 am, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> John H Palmieri wrote: >>> an error in matrix_double_dense, which I couldn't find on trac (should >>> I create a ticket?): Yes, please create tickets for both of these errors. > sage: scipy.linalg.det(b) > 0.

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

On Nov 12, 6:41 am, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John H Palmieri wrote: > > an error in matrix_double_dense, which I couldn't find on trac (should > > I create a ticket?): > > > sage -t  devel/sage/sage/matrix/matrix_double_dense.pyx > >

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

John H Palmieri wrote: >> Expect some numerical noise doctest failures and some other related >> known issues. Please report issues here and check trac for existing >> tickets. > > On an intel mac running 10.5 (after changing my stone-age shell :), > sage -testall has two or three problems: > >

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

Hi all, So there's one annoying new problem with rc0, and it's partly my fault. Here's the issue: if you do a fresh build, and then clone, it's going to do a sage -ba. The underlying problem is coming from the way trac #4500 (which is a genuine bug) interacts with our new build system. I'll fix i

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

mabshoff wrote: > Hello folks, > > Sources and a sage.math only binary can be found at > > http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/release-cycles-3.2/ > On Fedora 8, 32 bits one test failure: [EMAIL PROTECTED] sage-3.2.rc0]$ ./sage -t devel/sage/sage/combinat/species/library.py sage

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

I got the same matrix_double_dense failure as J. Palmieri on intel macs running 10.4 and 10.5, plus this one which only occured on the 10.5 machine: sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/wester.py ** File "/Users/mh/sagestuff/sage-3.

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

mabshoff wrote: > > Sources and a sage.math only binary can be found at > > http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/release-cycles-3.2/ > On Fedora 9, 32 bits the one and only failure: sage -t devel/sage/sage/combinat/root_system/weyl_characters.py*** *** Error: TIMED OUT! *** *** **

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

> Expect some numerical noise doctest failures and some other related > known issues. Please report issues here and check trac for existing > tickets. On an intel mac running 10.5 (after changing my stone-age shell :), sage -testall has two or three problems: the known numerical noise problem in

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

On Nov 11, 12:07 pm, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 11, 12:02 pm, John H Palmieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 11, 11:57 am, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > John H Palmieri wrote: > > > > On Nov 11, 4:24 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> He

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

On Nov 11, 12:02 pm, John H Palmieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 11, 11:57 am, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > John H Palmieri wrote: > > > On Nov 11, 4:24 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Hello folks, > > > >> here is 3.2.rc0 and I have to confess that I ch

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

Jaap Spies wrote: > John H Palmieri wrote: >> On Nov 11, 4:24 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Hello folks, >>> >>> here is 3.2.rc0 and I have to confess that I cheated: I did build this >>> on numerous platforms before announcing here (if you hung out in IRC >>> you knew about this rel

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

On Nov 11, 11:57 am, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John H Palmieri wrote: > > On Nov 11, 4:24 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hello folks, > > >> here is 3.2.rc0 and I have to confess that I cheated: I did build this > >> on numerous platforms before announcing here (if you

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

John H Palmieri wrote: > On Nov 11, 4:24 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hello folks, >> >> here is 3.2.rc0 and I have to confess that I cheated: I did build this >> on numerous platforms before announcing here (if you hung out in IRC >> you knew about this release for about 6 hours now

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

On Nov 11, 11:27 am, John H Palmieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 11, 4:24 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello folks, > > > here is 3.2.rc0 and I have to confess that I cheated: I did build this > > on numerous platforms before announcing here (if you hung out in IRC > > y

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.rc0 released

On Nov 11, 4:24 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello folks, > > here is 3.2.rc0 and I have to confess that I cheated: I did build this > on numerous platforms before announcing here (if you hung out in IRC > you knew about this release for about 6 hours now) and as it turns out > my cau

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

On Nov 7, 6:45 am, "Justin C. Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 5, 2008, at 15:44 , mabshoff wrote: > Mac OS X, 10.4.11 (Core 2 Duo): >    Built w/o problems >    All tests passed > > Mac OS X, 10.5.5 (Dual Quad Xeon): >    Built w/o problems.  Testing ("make -j2 test") gave 1 failu

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

OK, that's now #4463. On Nov 7, 8:21 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 7, 6:13 am, mhampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I just had one timeout failure on a PPC mac running 10.4, on modular/ > > abvar/homspace.py, plus the following malloc error which didn't cause > > the test

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

On Nov 5, 2008, at 15:44 , mabshoff wrote: > > Hello folks, > > here goes 3.2.alpha3 - somewhat later than planned. Hopefully we > fixed all numerical doctest noise from #788 (I even reverted a small > number of changes) and otherwise merged a couple other nice patches. > > If this release buil

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

On Nov 7, 6:13 am, mhampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just had one timeout failure on a PPC mac running 10.4, on modular/ > abvar/homspace.py, plus the following malloc error which didn't cause > the test to fail but maybe its worth noting: > > sage -t  devel/sage/sage/libs/pari/gen.pyx > p

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

I just had one timeout failure on a PPC mac running 10.4, on modular/ abvar/homspace.py, plus the following malloc error which didn't cause the test to fail but maybe its worth noting: sage -t devel/sage/sage/libs/pari/gen.pyx python(5728) malloc: *** vm_allocate(size=409600) failed (error c

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

All tests passed on my intel mac, running 10.4. I am building and testing on a PPC 10.4 as well, but I won't be awake when that finishes. -Marshall On Nov 6, 9:41 pm, Dan Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 at 01:09PM -0500, David Joyner wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/sagefil

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 at 01:09PM -0500, David Joyner wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/sagefiles/sage-3.2.alpha3$ ./sage -t > devel/sage/sage/interfaces/lisp.py > sage -t devel/sage/sage/interfaces/lisp.py > [11.8 s] I'm using Intrepid amd64 and get the same failures as Franco. > [EMAIL PROTEC

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

mabshoff wrote: > Jaap, > > can you please open a ticket for that one. I suspect that we don't > have anything tested via long or that the tests aren't properly marked > "#long time". This one has popped up so often that we really ought to > fix it once and for all since you hit it every time. >

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

On Nov 6, 1:28 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 1:27 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yeah, that would be great. I am curious if we should push for an rc0 > > fixing only critical bugs in the next 24 hours to release shortly or > > if we shoul

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 1:27 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Nov 6, 1:24 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > Did you run the tests on the build farm or is >> > there coming more? >> >> I only built on bsd and sage.math and modular. I haven't >> built on th

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.2.alpha3 released

On Nov 6, 1:24 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Did you run the tests on the build farm or is > > there coming more? > > I only built on bsd and sage.math and modular.  I haven't > built on the build farm.  Should I? Yeah, that would be great. I am curious if we should push

  1   2   >